The Hidden World - A Critique (DUPLICATE)
by 10Blue10
Summary: Discussions with fellow authors and my own considerations have led me to the conclusion that How To Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World is not nearly as impressive as people appear to think. To explain why, I have written a comprehensive essay detailing the major writing flaws of the film, section by section, from the least to most egregious.
1. The Hidden World - A Critique

'The Hidden World' – A Critique

Disclaimer: I don't own HTTYD (if I did, this movie would be very different)

Introduction

The following is a critique of 'How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World', that combines my analysis with the analyses and observations of a few of my fellow writers, who also objected to this movie. Before I proceed to explain the flaws in the movie, I want to acknowledge what I did enjoy about the film.

A movie is like a cake. The story is the cake itself, and everything else – animation, music, world-building etc is the icing on the cake. And the icing on this movie-cake is great! There are stunning visuals, a lovely if forgettable score, and lots of juicy world-building tidbits. Even the writing is not all bad. There are several genuinely humorous, heartwarming and moving scenes. I'm a sucker for cuteness and the Night Lights are adorable.

My favourite aspect of the movie is the humour. Not all of the jokes land, they never do, but in particular, Toothless' attempt at a mating dance and Ruffnut annoying Grimmel are hilarious. You can practically hear the Light Fury thinking '_What is this dragon even _doing_?_' Or hear Grimmel thinking '_It's no _wonder_ they left this one behind. I need her alive, I need her alive, I need her alive…_' Also, the Hobgobblers are like dragon Tribbles.

THW is a cake. If you liked the whole cake, that's great. Some of us only liked the icing. We feel we were served a half-baked mess made by the Dreamworks equivalent of George Lucas, and we, and the franchise, deserved better.

* * *

The Big Picture

The George Lucas comparison comes courtesy of Tristanopsis. To quote: "Dean DeBlois really, really needs another screenwriter or two, as was the case in HTTYD1, an exemplar of tight writing, pacing, and direction. Giving him so much power this third film, being the executive producer and sole director and screenwriter leads to mistakes I can't see happening if he was working with someone else who had the ability to say no. He's like George Lucas – he has a vision for the franchise, but without people reining him in, the quality just isn't there." – Tristanopsis

The premise of the movie is that it will explain the dragon's disappearance, and that it is the culmination of Hiccup's coming-of-age story; that the eventual outcome is 'Hiccup is able to stand on his own'. The second part of the premise is not inherently flawed; however, I feel it was badly handled, and I question whether the first part, explaining the dragon's disappearance, was necessary. Here's a line from the HTTYD wiki page about the movie's development:

"In 2014, both Cressida Cowell, the author of the original _How to Train Your Dragon_ books, and DeBlois confirmed that, although the books and films have followed very different stories, they will both share the same ending of explaining why "dragons are no more"." – HTTYD Wiki

There's a common bit of writing advice that goes as follows – 'write the ending first'. It is good advice, but here's the problem. Dean DeBlois _didn't _write the ending first. Cressida Cowell did, and he decided that the movie was going to end the same way no matter what had happened in the series previously. They said it themselves – the books and films are _different stories. _Different stories should have different endings.

In fact, the movie _doesn't _share the same ending of the books. In the books, Hiccup follows in his predecessors footsteps to become King of the Wilderwest; there's none of this 'King of the Dragons' nonsense. The wild dragons go into hiding _of their own accord_, realising that they aren't ready to live in peace with humans any more than humans are ready to live in peace with them. The humans and dragons who _are_ living in peace, like Hiccup and Toothless, settle down in hiding on a new island, gee why does that sound familiar I wonder….

(Side note: I'm not saying the movie should have had the exact same ending as the books, merely pointing out that the books and movies exist in overlapping but separate spheres. Attempting to reconcile them was not necessary.)

As for 'explaining why dragons are no more' – if the premise of the original books is 'our world, but if dragons once existed', then the movie franchise was the perfect opportunity to _commit_ to a world with dragons. To have it be 'our world, but dragons exist'. For goodness sake, it's a franchise about horned-helmet Vikings riding dragons, historical accuracy went out the window from day one, people! Why have dragons if you're planning to get rid of them?

Barely anything in the first two movies or the TV/Netflix series can be construed as foreshadowing this ending; or worse, unconnected events will be pointed to as foreshadowing, applying it to the series in retrospect. Dean decided the movies were going to end a certain way regardless of how the rest of the story was written. He has no excuse for such a basic writing mistake. Saying 'the movie ends like this because the books do' is not good enough.

Writing and directing two movies where Toothless is portrayed as a _person_ in his own right, intelligent enough to befriend Hiccup and loyal enough to overcome freaking _mind control_, only to turn around and claim he's just an animal hearing the 'call of the wild' as an excuse to get him away from Hiccup, just so Dean could force the character into a position where he has to 'stand on his own', is _not good enough. _

Writing and directing two movies that show how Hiccup and Toothless, and by extension humans and dragons, are better _together, _and then using contrivances and plot devices to force them apart because he wanted to end the trilogy with the line "There were dragons when I was a boy", and burn the house down because _he _was ready to move out, Is. Not. Good Enough.

* * *

Bad Science

Now, I know what you're thinking. Who cares if it's not scientifically accurate? True, I'm not expecting hard science from a franchise with dragons. But to me, the writers using bad science and drawing attention to it suggests both a lack of forethought and the implied belief that the audience is so undiscerning that they will suspend their disbelief entirely and take everything at face value.

Well guess what Dreamworks. Some of us can see past the bullshit. However, if the 'bad science' argument doesn't appeal to you, there are also writing inconsistencies threaded into the two main instances of pseudoscience.

The Light Fury fires a plasma blast and flies through it, turning invisible. Even though the franchise already has camouflaging dragons (the Changewings), and never felt the need to explain _them_, the explanation for this trick is as follows:

"Light Furies possess the ability of seemingly disappearing when they fly through the blasts of their fire. This is, in fact, a form of cloaking that occurs when their skin heats up, which causes their scales to have mirror-like qualities, allowing them to temporarily blend in with their surroundings." – HTTYD Wiki.

And here's Le'letha to explain why that 'explanation' is complete nonsense:

"The "scale-heating thing" makes no sense at all on any level. There's a whole biology rant about heat impermeability, and body temperature, and that you can't heat-seal a living creature because they'll roast alive inside their own skin. There's a whole physics rant about how difficult continuous, even heating is - I mean, have the writers never burned the edges of brownies that were still goopy and raw in the middle, or is that just how bad a baker _I_ am? There's a whole rant about how a mirror is not invisibility: if you're walking along and you see yourself reflected in the side of an "invisible" dragon...that dragon is not invisible, you're going to notice them." – Le'letha

I'd also like to point out that when she's showing off this trick of hers to Toothless in the storm cloud, the effect only lasts a few seconds before she fades back into view, presumably as her scales cool off. It's not much of a camouflage method if she turns visible right afterwards. Which in turn brings me to another writing flaw – the inconsistency of her camouflage abilities.

In the beginning of the movie, the Light Fury fades into view, muzzled and in a cage. _Muzzled. _So how, exactly, did she use a plasma blast to heat her scales up? And if her scales are supposed to be 'mirror-like', shouldn't Toothless have seen his reflection in them? Besides, that entire scene is so obviously a contrivance. There's no reason for her to be invisible apart from so she doesn't get rescued and have a chance to realise sooner that these humans don't want to hurt her.

It seems as if the writers thought the Light Fury flying through her plasma blast and vanishing would look cool, and they made up the explanation afterwards. I propose that a better explanation would have been that she has the same kind of camouflage ability as a Changewing (after all, they did give Toothless random Skrill powers), and uses her plasma blasts as a smokescreen to distract her pursuers, kind of like an octopus squirting ink. Or, say, a cuttlefish…

* * *

Then there's the Hidden World itself. Yes, it looks incredible, but aesthetically pleasing as the locale might be, the idea that's a good place to send ALL THE DRAGONS is both scientifically inaccurate and inconsistent with previously established elements of this very franchise. In terms of the ecological effects, removing numerous apex predators from the food chain and their adapted habitats would, realistically, inevitably lead to negative consequences.

"And what are they all going to eat? Even ignoring that, you can't yank apex predators out of the food chain on a global scale. That's Ecology 101, or at minimum Biology 104. Let's talk about the American wolf, what the near-extinction of the wolf in the American west did to the ecosystem there, and how that's being remedied now (hint: they're reintroducing wolves)." – Le'letha

The idea that taking numerous endangered predators, many of whom eat the same prey and thus would be competing fiercely for resources, and placing them in an enclosed space (never mind how large the enclosure is), would be a viable solution to conservation efforts is ludicrous. If the Hidden World is meant to be a sort of 'dragon reserve', it fails on several counts to be adequate.

For all it's claimed to be the ancestral home of dragons, the underground caverns of the Hidden World are not a more suitable environment for dragons accustomed to open skies and wide oceans. It will restrict their movements; there's no way that enough fish to feed so many large and high energy organisms are being swept down that 'eternal waterfall'. It is another cage. (Also, re. the waterfall...the Hidden World should have flooded by now.)

Secondly, even if the adult dragons somehow found their way across the world to this new secret one, what about their eggs? Migrations are dangerous. Furthermore, in the epilogue Hiccup claims that the dragons have disappeared, "leaving not a bone or a fang for mankind to remember them by." Are we expected to believe that they took all of their skeletons with them, as well? (To be fair, that line could be seen as Hiccup just being overly dramatic and using 'Gobber-like flair'.)

The inconsistencies with the rest of the franchise are numerous. The TV/Netflix series established that there are non-flying dragons, such as Speed Stingers, and dragons that won't survive for long away from their food sources, like the Eruptodon and Buffalord, a dragon that eats _herbs_. Even if the general audience at large wasn't aware of this, the writing should have taken it into account.

(I'm sure someone's going to point out the Speed Stingers 'evolving' webbed feet as an explanation for how they get to the Hidden World. The adaptation is to allow them to island hop, not cross thousands of miles of open ocean.)

It was established in the second movie that baby dragons "listen to no-one." They don't listen to the Alpha – either they'd have to be carried along with the eggs, or they'd be left behind. This brings me to another issue – the notion that the dragons we see on screen are the full extent of the dragon population. This does not make sense. Even if many species of dragon have been hunted to near extinction, in this time period there would still be unexplored lands that humans have not yet discovered, with dragons already 'living in peace'.

"Hey, while we're at it, what about all the dragons still in cages? WORLDWIDE. Can they magically walk through iron bars now? If so, what's the big deal and why can't we just have Toothless (who gave him global domination anyway?) yell "come out, come out wherever you are!" or the equivalent every Monday morning?" – Le'letha

There's also the fact that the directors inspiration, the book/movie 'Born Free', depicts an entirely different state of affairs than the one shown in the movies. Based on a true story, 'Born Free' is about a lion cub who is taken from her natural habitat into an artificial, man-made environment, and later released back into the wild to be with her own kind.

In the world of HTTYD, however, the dragons are already _in_ their natural habitat. They can come and go as they please, interact with their own kind at will. The irony is that by sending them to the Hidden World, Dean DeBlois is putting them in, essentially, an artificial man-made environment. He had to make a new 'wild' for them, and it fails to be a convincing alternative.

The most 'unnatural' aspect of the Berk dragons' lives was the humans, whom they stayed with for companionship, care and mental stimulation. Or so one might believe, but this movie appears to be working on the assumption that the dragons are, at most, animals following an instinct to stay with their 'Alpha'.

"And they're not even all that consistent about it. Grimmel is listing off all sorts of racist stereotypes about them, like being thieves and whatnot, which implies a humanoid intelligence, yet in the very same movie, they imply the dragons are just animals and Toothless is answering "the call of the wild".

"Except if they are just animals, they've spent years being domesticated, no way in hell they could all just go live in the wild on a whim, on Hiccup's whim. Not to mention, them having a hidden world doesn't make sense if they're just animals, we certainly don't give bears or wolves their own hidden world just because they're dangerous. But then, if dragons are supposed to be mystical creatures somehow above animals...then why do they have to leave in the first place? Aaarrgh." – Nyxelestia

Aaarrgh indeed, my friend. Aaarrgh indeed. Oh, and one other thing – the Hidden World is clearly an ancient place, as shown by the massive stalactites, and its caverns and tunnels supposedly spread around the world. Okay, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on that, but the Hidden World is full of dragons. There's already a world's worth of dragons down there, and they want to throw in another world's worth? And shouldn't the dragons of the Hidden World already, y'know, _have _an Alpha? Wait a minute…they do! Drago's Bewilderbeast is down there! Why can't _he _be King of the Hidden World?!

* * *

A Grim Portrayal

Just to be clear, I don't think Grimmel is a bad villain. He just seems to be better in theory than in practice. I mean, conceptually, he's a brilliant idea for a villain. A version of canon Hiccup gone bad, the slayer of Night Furies which makes his and Hiccup's enmity more personal, he's intelligent and creepy, he's not out to take over the world, he's just in it for himself. Grimmel was full of potential.

However, as Tristanopsis explained to me, the writing didn't live up to that:

"The problem with Grimmel seems to be bad writing. Almost every time he opens his mouth, he diminishes his credibility. He's claimed he's killed all the Night Furies, yet he isn't aware of the most conspicuous one a Viking chief rides everywhere rescuing dragons. He claims Night Furies can't survive in the cold, yet a significant portion of HTTYD2 involves Toothless playing in a frozen land, jumping and burying himself in snow, and being rescued from ice-cold ocean water without a hint of being affected by it. He says Night Furies can't fly long distances without rest, yet the Romantic Flight scene in HTTYD1 has him gliding most of the time and barely flapping at all, which hardly takes any effort. Whoever gave him those lines most likely didn't think about whether they're true or not for more than a fraction of a second.

"In terms of plot events, he failed to capture Toothless with his trap in the woods, he took unnecessary risks by walking into a trap on enemy ground, and he failed to capture Hiccup and co. in his own trap. The moment the gang arrived and knocked him off his crossbow platform he was retreating and fleeing the whole time. Hardly intimidating.

"He was rarely given a chance to demonstrate to us that he is supposedly an intelligent villain. There was too much tell, not show, another sign of bad writing. He escaped Hiccup's trap not due to his deviousness but rather Hiccup not thinking to capture him right away nor posting guards outside to stop an escape. Ruffnut's capture was clearly portrayed as a mistake on Berk's end, not the result of clever planning.

"He lost another chance to demonstrate his ingenuity by relying on Ruffnut to figure out where Berk went rather using clues and his own reasoning. The Light Fury, being wary of humans, drove Toothless away from New Berk, Grimmel's target, and it was only extreme convenience that they all arrived in one spot the moment Grimmel landed on the island. His failures are numerous, and his successes are due to luck or the incompetence of others.

"Drago in comparison, other than a slight misjudgment in the first battle, was an unstoppable force the whole time until the very end. He managed to get Stoick killed. He is a formidable threat. Grimmel is nothing in comparison." – Tristanopsis

((A possible in-universe explanation for Grimmel's claim that Night Furies can't survive in the cold is that they can't survive in it for long periods of time - weeks, months or years.)

The main way that Grimmel's intelligence is displayed, is by making the characters around him incompetent. It is not good writing to make one character look good by bringing other characters below their level.

Not to mention – I might be forgetting something, but I don't think it's ever explained _why _he hunts Night Furies in particular in the first place. He tells Hiccup that he found a sleeping Night Fury and killed it, and his village called him a hero (for slaying a defenceless creature, way to go tough guy)…so, he decided to kill all the rest? Is it some sort of prestige thing, because he's hunting one of the more dangerous dragons? I honestly don't remember the reason.

To bring it back to the ending, for that is where the majority of the problems lie…TamerLorika pointed out to Leletha and she in turn to me that when you think about it…Grimmel won. He hated dragons, he wanted a world without dragons, and in the end that's exactly what he got. Grimmel didn't live to see it happen, and the warlords failed, but so did Hiccup and the Berkians, willingly.

It was pointed out to me that it doesn't matter if Grimmel 'won', because it's not about a game of oneupmanship between Hiccup and his opponents. I agree, Hiccup's goal throughout the film was not to defeat Grimmel but to keep the dragons safe, and I do understand his motivation for letting Toothless and the dragons go. It isn't a character flaw I'm trying to point out, but a writing flaw.

The issue with Grimmel's posthumous victory is not that it is a victory for him personally, but for his harmful ideology. This should never be condoned. To me, the dragons have always been an analogy for 'the other', an out-group accepted by some but demonised by the majority due to ignorance and prejudice.

This movie's 'solution' to that issue is to isolate the groups with the vague hope that 'one day things might change'. Changes like this happen when somebody _makes _them happen. Heck, at the end of HTTYD2, Hiccup says these very words:

"_We may be small in numbers, but we stand for something bigger than anything the world can pit against us. We are the voice of peace. And bit by bit, we will change this world." _But because Dean wanted the trilogy to end with "there were dragons when I was a boy", this empowering statement is ignored and given up on by the characters even after they have defeated Grimmel and utterly trashed his armada. Which isn't such a huge threat to them after all.

"You DO NOT concede to the people who tell you that your existence, your standing up for the rights of others to be who they are and to live free, is wrong. You do not let the b*** grind you down. Even if the whole world is against you. You stand. You look them in the eye, and you say, "No. You're wrong. Look at the good we are doing here." – Le'letha

I couldn't have put it better myself.

* * *

The Living Plot Device

This movie introduces us to the Light Fury, a female member of a subspecies of Night Fury. Here's a quote from Dean DeBlois himself about this particular dragon: "The Light Fury is an engine of change in our story, representing the call of the wild, which is key to Toothless' destiny."

He's practically boasting about it. The Light Fury is not a character – she is a plot device, plain and simple. Now if you liked her, or think she and Toothless make a cute couple, then that's fine. To each their own, but we should at least acknowledge that she was written to be "Toothless' mate" and nothing else.

For starters, try to describe her personality. Here's one possible description:

"Although skittish and skeptical, the Light Fury also shares Toothless' deep sense of empathy and will always wield her plasma blast to defend any in need." – HTTYD Wiki, quoting 'Dragonpedia'.

Now, how much of that did we see in the movie? I'm not disputing that she's 'skittish and sceptical', and one could see her saving Hiccup's life as showing empathy, but when exactly did she wield her plasma blast to defend any in need? As far as I remember, she used them to shoot at Hiccup and Astrid, turn herself temporarily invisible, and…that's about it. But it's been a while since I've seen the film, so if anyone can remind me of another instance I'd be grateful.

Then there's the fact that for a wild animal, she's really feminised and sexualised. Think about it. She's pure white and really smooth, with nary a scar or scale out of place. Her wings have pinkish glitter on them. Her tail-fins resemble a heart shape. The scene where Toothless sees her for the first time is shot in a way that makes it look like she's giving him a coy 'come-hither' glance.

(Glimpses of a possibly male Light Fury in the Hidden World suggest that in-universe, the species displays sexual dimorphism.)

Yes, animals have an instinct to mate. They don't go around giving each other bedroom eyes. Which brings us back to this idea that she represents 'the call of the wild' to Toothless. What 'call' could that possibly be other than 'breed'?

"And then the Light Fury comes in, playing the most classic trope of forcing a man to choose between his friends and the prospect of his own family/life – I've seen people call her the 'Thot Fury'." – Nyxelestia

Now, I'm not saying Toothless shouldn't have a mate. Or that we needed the LF to have a complete backstory and complex personality, given the limited runtime. What I'm trying to say is that having her be there purely to awaken primal, sexual instincts in Toothless both undermines his previous characterisation and is part of the contrived way we get to the ending.

Upon encountering the Light Fury, the over-protective and loyal dragon we know does not react with hostility to the dragon shooting fire blasts at his human friends. When she knocks Hiccup off his back, Toothless just stares at her for a few seconds before realising what has happened. Rather than earn his trust, the Light Fury makes Toothless want to mate with her straightaway.

"I'm aiming for something a little more sophisticated and respectful to Toothless than "this female smells good, she is my mate now forever even though I know nothing about her, drooooooool".)" – Le'letha

His attraction and affection to the Light Fury is given precedence over his bond with Hiccup. Toothless rescues Hiccup and Astrid in the Hidden World, but this is the bare minimum of concern compared to his previous characterisation. He doesn't act happy to see Hiccup again, but reacts with enthusiasm when he realises the Light Fury, his new mate, has followed them back to New Berk.

Toothless is regressed, written out of character to fit the plot rather than the plot being written to fit the characters. The Light Fury is the 'engine', as Dean himself puts it, used in an attempt to justify that. This is not just bad writing, it is disrespectful to all the characters involved and the audience who are invested in them. But if you still don't think she's a plot device, then let me ask you this:

What precisely is it about this particular dragon that makes her untameable?

If you have an answer, I'd really like to hear it; but to save time, I'll go through a few of the reasons I think people might give:

(1) She's a wild dragon, she's not meant to be tamed.

Toothless was a wild dragon. And not all of the dragons are tamed and trained, they stay because they like it there. She shouldn't have to be any different.

(2) She doesn't trust humans.

Again, neither did Toothless at first. Yes, she was captured, but the other captured dragons came around. She saved Hiccup's life. He earned her trust with his sacrifice, so why couldn't she learn to trust other humans? Besides, if humans make her uncomfortable, she can turn invisible. She could be around without 'being around', if you see what I mean.

(3) She represents a call of the wild to Toothless.

Okay, yes, she's a female he can mate with. Why does that mean they have to leave? Sure, maybe they'd leave for a while to…well, you know…but then they could come back. How does 'need to mate' equal 'leave forever'?

Now seems as good a time as any to move onto one of my biggest issues with this movie, and by far the most misunderstood of my criticisms.

* * *

Romance VS Friendship

On the surface, the movie is supposed to be about moving on, letting go and standing on your own. One of the most common rebuttals I received when I first posted a list of criticisms (some of which, admittedly, were too personal to be on the list and thus haven't been mentioned here), was that Hiccup letting Toothless go is a show of self-sacrificing love. "If you love them, let them go."

People seemed to think I misunderstood that, or disagree with it, but I don't. My issue isn't with the message itself, it's with the build up. It's not the destination in itself that bothers me, it's the journey. It's how they got to this point – by contrivances. Don't believe me? Let's go through the list –

(1) The Light Fury is untameable despite other wild dragons being tamed and her saving Hiccups life, thus showing she doesn't completely mistrust him.

(2) The Hidden World dragons are hostile to Hiccup and Astrid even though animals with no experience of humans shouldn't know to fear them, meaning that humans going to live there is cut off as a possibility.

(3) Toothless is apparently the King of Dragons, as in _all dragons ever, _so if he leaves with the Light Fury all the other dragons have to go with him.

Actually, let's talk about that. I'm sorry, but 'the King of Dragons' shouldn't be a thing. It makes no sense, either from a meta perspective or in universe. I was under the impression that the humans called Bewilderbeasts 'the king of dragons' because they're rare and massive and have hypnotic abilities. So, Toothless challenging and defeating Drago's Bewilderbeast somehow transferred this ability onto him? How the bleep does that work?

In the second film, Valka says "every nest has its Queen." Every nest has its own leader, and Toothless is the leader of the dragons on Berk, just as Hiccup is leader of the humans. Toothless shows loyalty, not just to Hiccup, but to all of Berk and its dragons, and earns their loyalty in return. Then he gets to the Hidden World and all the dragons there bow down to him because…?

Seriously. Have they just been waiting for him to turn up for who knows how long? Why is this _one_ dragon 'destined' to be the leader of hundreds if not thousands of dragons? Are the writers trying to say that Toothless was the King of Dragons all along, and we just didn't know it? Is the reason Grimmel hasn't heard of him because he was 'protected by the arcane forces of destiny'?!

"_If you love someone, set them free. If they come back they're yours; if they don't they never were"_ – Richard Bach. This is a good message; if you love someone you should be able to put their needs above your own. The thing is, that sort of sacrifice only works on a personal, individual level. Something that only affects you and the people around you, not the entire world.

In 'Gift of the Night Fury', this is precisely what happens. Hiccup builds the auto-tail and gives Toothless his freedom, no strings attached. The decision only affects him and the people around him – and I want to point out the parallel between Hiccup & Toothless with the Vikings & Dragons. All of the humans are dealing with the possibility of not seeing their dragons again, but Hiccup is affected more because of his already established close bond with Toothless.

Take a look at the second part of that quote. "If they come back, they're yours; if they don't they never were." In GOTNF, Toothless _comes back. _Of his own free will, he comes back and chooses to stay with Hiccup. The movie tries to explain this away by saying that he didn't have a reason to leave; but he _did _have a reason to stay. Except now, apparently, he doesn't anymore.

"If they don't they never were." In THW, Toothless leaves and _doesn't_ come back. Hiccup has to go to him. Apparently, he _forgets _Hiccup. How does this not sour the beautiful friendship we've seen throughout the trilogy? Were the writers trying to say that Toothless doesn't belong to Hiccup? No, he doesn't, but Hiccup never treated him like that. He only treats Toothless like a pet when the writers can't decide if the dragons _are _pets or people in their own right (I'm firmly in the latter camp). Even if he is domesticated, is that such a bad thing?

"Sure. Love comes with loss, and that's normal. But deliberately imposing that loss, because, well, "stuff is hard and also drama, aren't we so TRAGIC" is ridiculous. If you're clinging to someone you love and it's hurting them, that's not love. But Toothless was not being harmed by his bond with Hiccup - quite the opposite! Are you telling me bright, curious Toothless didn't do more interesting things and face more interesting challenges and learn more things with Hiccup than he would have as a wild dragon who had never crossed Hiccup's path? He learned to DRAW, as just the most blatant example! That relationship was ENHANCING Toothless' quality of life and mental stimulation, not limiting him." – Le'letha

The idea that Toothless is a pet/mere animal doesn't gel with his repeatedly proven intelligence and loyalty to Hiccup. He chooses to go with a dragon he's only known for a few days and forgets about the friend he spent six years with. Then there's Hiccup and Astrid; he's supposed to let Toothless go so he can 'stand on his own', but in the same movie, Astrid is assigned (some might say demoted) to the role of 'supportive partner'. She's there to soften the blow.

So the writers acknowledge that Hiccup needs to be independent / self-confident, but can also have a source of emotional support. Okay, but why does his source of support have to be his romantic partner and not his platonic one? Why does it have to be one or the other? It's not as if people stop having friends when they're married in real life. If they do, then I really don't want to marry.

Besides, Astrid isn't even all that supportive. When Hiccup becomes worried about Toothless' well-being when the dragon doesn't return as expected, she tells him "You gave him his freedom, Hiccup. What were you expecting?" Astrid knows how much Toothless means to Hiccup, and she basically tells him to get over it. Still, she does take him to find Toothless, so I'll chalk that brief moment of callous unconcern up to bad writing, and dialogue not being thought through.

* * *

Standing Alone

I also want to address this idea that Hiccup needs to let Toothless go in order to be able to 'stand on his own'. Absolutely, he should be able to feel confident as a leader and an individual without being emotionally dependent on Toothless. But the writers throw him in at the deep end, essentially saying "Toothless has to leave, so now Hiccup _has_ to stand on his own." They've done this before.

In HTTYD2, Stoick's death forces Hiccup to accept the responsibility of being Chief that he was previously avoiding. It's heartbreaking, but it's justified. The writing makes it clear that only something drastic will snap Hiccup out of his 'I can make Drago change' mindset. Stoick's death is foreshadowed, what with him planning to retire (always a red flag), and his own dialogue –

"I thought I'd have to die before we had that dance again."

"It takes more than a little fire to kill me!"

Hiccup having to let go of Toothless is heartbreaking as well, but unlike Stoick's death I don't feel it's adequately justified by the narrative. It is foreshadowed throughout the film, although if you ask me, they beat us over the head with it; but the writing decisions that forced the characters into this hard decision are contrived. Again, it's not the 'what' that bothers me, it's the 'how'.

Yes, in real life friends grow apart, and hard choices have to be made. But also in real life, if someone is relying too much on the support of another, the solution isn't to separate them entirely and expect the person to just get over it. Hiccup's attachment to Toothless was never the problem, it was at most a symptom of a problem – his lack of self-confidence, which could easily be addressed and overcome without having to separate them entirely.

As I mentioned previously, I have no problem with the notion that love means loss and letting go. My issue is with the inconsistent, contrived way the writers take the characters to that point. Furthermore, Hiccup lets his emotions cloud his judgement at every turn of this film, especially when it comes to the ending, and that I feel is disrespectful to both the character and the audience.

He keeps bringing dragons back to Berk despite the obvious overcrowding problem, seemingly more concerned with their comfort and well-being than that of his own people. His plan for dealing with the threat of Grimmel is to basically run away, and fly around until they find the Hidden World. A place he's only heard about from his father's stories and doesn't know for sure exists.

I honestly feel like his thought process was along the lines of "I really want to find the Hidden World, but I can't leave Berk because I'm Chief…I know, I'll just bring all of Berk _with_ me. It's GENIUS."

If Hiccup had let Toothless go simply so he could be with the Light Fury, that would have been a far more natural portrayal of self-sacrificing love. When someone has responsibility and/or authority over others, they will sometimes need to make decisions that affect those under them. They should not make decisions on others behalf, based on their own personal issues. People have called it a mature decision to send Toothless, and by extension all of the dragons away, 'for their own safety'. What I and others see is Hiccup making a rushed, ill-informed, emotional decision, that affects everyone around him.

"If a few dragons here and there wanted to withdraw from the world and live underground, that would be fine, and I would support them doing that…But HE HAD NO RIGHT to order everyone from their homes and their lives and their world, and into somewhere else because he didn't feel like he could protect the entire world - which is also NOT ON HIM. That's insanely high-handed and presumptuous. The best way to protect the whole world is to persuade others that what you're doing, and how you're doing it, is the way things should be - not by giving up and saying "well, this just isn't going to work, eh, too bad, we tried but it was hard so we quit." We only know about conditions in the Archipelago - who's to say that other cultures, elsewhere in the world, aren't living and working with dragons as well? Or at least alongside them? Or have at least reached a truce? What happens to them? And the notion of dragons as "menacing predators" is HUGELY Western - in Asian cultures, dragons are BENIGN and wise, and personify the concepts of a balanced world. What, did this one decision by a young chief in some backwater corner of Northern Europe have worldwide repercussions, and if so what gave him the right?" – Le'letha

"And if you're not willing to fight for what you love, what kind of measly halfhearted love is that? Hiccup just GAVE UP, and he pushed Toothless away - and then because "peace is hard, meh", he pushed ALL the dragons away. What kind of "if I can't have this relationship/experience I love, NO ONE can" presumptive temper tantrum is that? …Love tries. Love overcomes. Love - like life - finds a way. And yes, sometimes love loses - but that ending just gave up with a whimper. That's not good enough." – Le'letha

* * *

What Could Have Been, and What Is

You know what the really frustrating part is? Dean DeBlois apparently missed all the foreshadowing in the first two films that point the movies as a whole towards a similar but far more satisfying conclusion. Toothlessgolfer outlines the issue in their own analysis on their FFN profile, and I highly recommend reading the whole piece, but for now here's a condensed version:

"One, Hiccup leaves the village, goes out into the wild, enters a little hidden world (the cove), meets a wild dragon, disarms himself through an act of trust, and interacts peacefully.

Two, the Berk humans invited dragons onto Berk after the Red Death's downfall and protected their dragons against the violent/untrusting humans. Could the dragons do likewise and parallel their humans' actions?

Three, Valka's presence in the wild nest for over twenty years is an obvious foreshadowing of it being possible to live in harmony with wild dragons, even if as a crazy, feral, vigilante, dragon-person.

Four, Valka's words to the heartbroken Hiccup after Stoick's death in film II are blatantly clear foreshadowing – 'Only you can bring our worlds together. That is who you are...' The unspoken corollary is that if he cannot do it, no one will... ever.

Five, the Berk humans leaving Berk and becoming a refugee people is a clear and definitive statement that they are not Vikings anymore. They sailed to Berk and flew away from it. They have become something different and, if presented with a return to what they were in the past, symbolized by Berk as the home of their grandparents, they would choose to leave behind that past. They would rather become immigrants than break up their extended family. That is a powerful message and is a perfect example of a 'letting go' and 'moving on' that is uplifting and good to teach.

For me, the concept of a hidden world, even if it is somewhat of a prison in practice, is not so much of a problem, given that the series does have to explain why 'there were dragons when [he] was a boy'. Either they all died off or they are in hiding somewhere. The logistical/environmental problems with that solution of moving a lot of dragons down into a confined environment are definitely an issue, but they can be plausibly assumed away by assuming that THW is much larger/unexplored in places, especially since we did not get to see much of it in the film. A greater objection to this resolution is that there is no reason to assume that any future human-dragon interactions will be peaceful after the dragons have been in isolation for hundreds of years. The writers seem to naively assume that all the obstacles to peace are exclusively the fault of humans, hence the need for Hiccup's 'story' to change the world. But I would argue that the dragons also need a reason to trust humans (or simply to know that humans exist...)

Name one time in history when voluntary segregation and isolationism helped promote peace between two groups when people from those groups try to cross borders. I wager that there are none." – toothlessgolfer

Now as I mentioned previously, I disagree that having the movies end with the dragon's disappearance was necessary. However, if the third movie had to end like this, then it could have been done in a way that better aligns with the previous two, and more importantly, didn't retroactively undermine the rest of the franchise by showing that all the effort was for naught.

I'm sorry, but it is not a profound or meaningful lesson to say "Life isn't always fair." No, peace might never be realised, either in real life or in the world of HTTYD; but it is unrealistic and even toxic to present segregation with no exceptions as a blanket 'solution' to this complex issue. That's not just _my _view, either:

"Real-world parallels to the refugee crisis make "send them back where they came from" a pernicious, racist, and flat-out dangerous argument." – PutMoneyInThyPurse

"One message embedded in this film is that the way to ensure peace among different groups is to physically segregate them by race – the human race and the dragon race – with no exceptions. This is morally repugnant to propose as the answer. Peace is only attainable through living together in a joining of lives in a way for better or for worse. Yes, there are 'occupational hazards' in making such a world. Some feelings get hurt, and some people might not like it at first. However, that melting pot of cultures is the only way to bring about change." – toothlessgolfer

"Combined with the implicit racism in all the POC in the franchise being villains and the segregationist message of HTTYD 3 - "they have to remain separated from the rest of us/the world for their own good!" – Nyxelestia

"Resolving the conflict by separating dragons and humans is disturbing in its implications. It implies that segregation is a valid strategy, and presents an option that is impossible and inapplicable in real life." – Tristanopsis

Some might say that all these implications were not intended and therefore should be dismissed, but this is not a good argument. These unfortunate implications are there whether or not they were intentional, and they should be pointed out as examples of bad writing / lack of forethought. Are we saying the writers are racist? No. Are we saying the writing has racist connotations? Yes.

* * *

Rebuttals Squared 

Naturally, in posting a contentious opinion (although these days, it seems like _any_ unpopular opinion is contentious), I've had people disagree, and I'm cool with that, but I want to address a few of the more common rebuttals here to save time. First, there's this idea that seems prevalent online - that every opinion is equally valid and should be equally respected. It's not that simple, I'm afraid. If it's about something completely subjective, like your favourite flavour of ice cream, then sure, nobody's opinion of that is any more valid than another's. However, when facts are involved - facts like writing flaws noticed independently by multiple people -, an opinion based on the facts _is_ more valid than an opinion based on emotions. Everyone's right to _voice _their opinion should be respected, but imagine you're trying to explain something to someone, or talk about a topic you feel passionate about - how would you feel if their responses boiled down to "It's just my/your opinion!" How quickly would you get frustrated and just drop the subject? Saying 'all opinions are equally valid' is essentially saying that all opinions are equally meaningless.

Then there's the idea that it's pointless to criticise a movie that's already been made, and that it's just causing tension in the fandom. Well, by that logic all professional critics should just quit, because they criticise movies 'after they've already been made'. I wrote this because I really love this franchise, enough to acknowledge when it's flawed, and so people can learn from this movie's mistakes. As for causing tension within the fandom - how boring would it be, really, if we all agreed on everything? Differing opinions, especially negative opinions, should be encouraged, or the discourse becomes stale. Finally, there's the idea that this is 'just' an animated/fantasy/kids movie, and thus shouldn't be subjected to the same scrutiny. Reddit user RepoMK1 wrote a brilliant essay of his own (linked above in the notes), and his response to this argument puts it better than I could:

"You're overthinking this, it's just a stupid kids movie. Just shut up and enjoy the pretty colours on the screen."

This point I don't get the most of all. For one, it's implying that kids are stupid and should just eat up whatever garbage you give them. Isn't the fact that it's a kid's movie put even bigger scrutiny on it? You want the best for kids, not the worst.

And second of all, which what bothers me the most of all, is that **_The other movies did not need to have excuses made for them._**

It does the effort put into every other part of the franchise a massive disservice to overlook the flaws in the writing of this one when every other movie and special in the series managed to go above and beyond.

They got accross their messages without plotholes or inconsistencies, and the more time you spent analysing them, they got better and better instead of worse.

Look, I'm not saying you can't enjoy the movie, it's certainly very pretty and has a nice soundtrack, you may like the ending for one reason or another, maybe because it resonates with you or because it made you emotional, but if you claim to analyze things beyond a surface level you have to aknowledge the plethora of flaws, plotholes, inconsistencies and character breaks this movie has to get to said ending in the first place.

In essence, the plot was not driven by characters with established traits reacting in a plausible manner to challenging scenarios, but rather bent them to reach a specific conclusion.

The seperation only happened because the plot demanded to, and the characters only acted so out of character and inconsistently because the director wanted to force the ending, but my issue is again: The other movies and installments didn't need excuses made for them, they got their message without compromising plot of characters.

The other movies didn't an excuse, and neither should this one.

And no, I don't believe this needs to be said but it does, I don't hate the series. The only reason I even bothered (and was able) to put this thing toogether is because of how much I love the series and the characters and believe they deserved much more and much better than this." - RepoMK1

* * *

Conclusion

For me, the biggest problem with this movie's ending is that it retroactively sours my experience of the entire franchise. We'll always have the first two movies and the episodes, but now when I watch any of them that thought will be there in the back of my mind – 'it's all for nothing.' All that development wasted, all that potential cut off in order to match the ending of a book series they were loosely inspired by and had already all but entirely diverged from.

You might think I'm idealistic, but I'm not. I know that life is unfair and love hurts. Everyone knows that. It honestly baffles me that people can see a movie that tries to have a neat, tidy solution to a complex issue as being 'realistic'. Fictional stories don't have to tell us "this is the way the world is". We have real life for that. They are a chance to say, "This is the way the world _could_ be."

I wasn't expecting them to end the trilogy with world peace between humans and dragons. That really would be unrealistic. Yet the movie's 'bittersweet' ending is, in its own way, just as unrealistic. Even if Hiccup's story changed the world on a conceptual level, there's no reason for it to change in a practical sense, without dragons to interact with and integrate into human civilisation.

Imagine if the Hidden World was rediscovered in the 21st century. Think about how ill-suited the dragons would be to our way of life, our infrastructure, our damage to the environment. Think of what today's hunters and trappers could do to them. The essay by toothlessgolfer does a far better job of explaining in depth why the epilogue to THW is far more bitter than it is sweet.

I'm not the only one who feels this way. Perhaps these criticisms don't matter to everyone, but they matter to us. We're writers, we notice these things, and seeing the characters we love and a world we're invested in be so mishandled by the very people who created it all in the first place bothers us. We know we deserved better. The franchise deserved better. _All of us _deserved better.

If you enjoyed the movie despite its flaws, that's fine. You're not wrong for doing so, but please don't tell us we're wrong for disliking it, or that we're 'immature and unrealistic', or that we're not seeing the bigger picture. We do see the big picture, but we also see the problems within it. Writing flaws that are present whether or not any individual viewer or fan enjoyed the movie.

I'm not expecting this essay to change anyone's mind. If it does, that's cool, but I didn't write this for the people who enjoyed 'The Hidden World'. I wrote it for myself, and for anyone who perhaps disliked the movie but couldn't articulate why, or didn't want to go against the grain of popular opinion. You're not alone.

The movie can't be changed, but if these flaws aren't pointed out then the same thing will happen again. So no matter how many people might disagree, I stand by what I've said. 'HTTYD: The Hidden World' is a badly written movie, and I hope that this nearly 8000 word essay has done a decent job of explaining why.

Thank you for reading.


	2. Further Criticisms of The Hidden World

Further Criticisms of The Hidden World

The following is a list of various minor and major criticisms from throughout the internet. Please bear in mind that these are gathered from multiple sources, including the comments of the first chapter, and therefore don't necessarily all reflect my/our own views.

Aesthetic and technical choices:

(1) It has an overprocessed, airbrushed look. Surfaces are far too shiny. The characters look like they were dipped in grease considering the ridiculous amount of reflections. The character models are textureless and look like animated dolls.

(2) Poorer cinematography. Fewer breathtaking shots compared to HTTYD2.

(3) The Light Fury design is overtly feminized, in a bad way. The most egregious examples are glitter, a tailfin shaped like a heart, and her sounds. This is not in vogue with the times. Compare to modern female characters like Wyldstyle in the LEGO movies or Shank in Ralph Breaks the Internet, who clearly evoke femininity without being girly girls.

(4) The music is excellent as a standalone soundtrack, but there's too little usage of HTTYD motifs to indicate that it's a HTTYD film.

(5) No TJ Miller!

* * *

Characters:

(1) Toothless has regressed. All his development regarding how his bond with Hiccup overcomes any natural instinct has been thrown out the window. Actual Toothless: pissed off at Light Fury attacking Hiccup. The Light Fury needs to gradually earn his trust and respect. Imposter Toothless: concerns about Hiccup's well-being vanishes the moment he sees the Light Fury. Hardly any development on how he struggles with moving on from Hiccup. No visits after he leaves. He is an unequal partner in their friendship. He is not a good leader, negotiating with a terrorist to send hundreds of dragons away to their enslavement or death.

(2) Hiccup has become his parents. He doesn't find an alternative way and thinks that people cannot change. The quirky, unconventional Hiccup has been erased. Hiccup has never been a bad leader. He managed to successfully lead an attack on the nest, reworked the village to be able to live with dragons, led his friends in both battles with Drago, rebuilt the village after HTTYD2, and many, many more examples if the TV series and comics are taken as canon. Why is he still beating himself over about this?

(3) Grimmel's numerous failures underplay the threat he is to Berk. Drago, in comparison, is an unstoppable force until the very end.

(4) Astrid: borderline on creating a toxic relationship. A friendship should not interfere with her relationship with Hiccup, and it never had before. She should accept Hiccup for what he is, not manipulate him into being what she wants him to be.

(5) Snotlout/Valka. No. Just no.

(6) The gang: they were nowhere near as incompetent in previous films. Consider their teamwork in the Red Death or Bewilderbeast battles. It's clear they've been rescuing dragons since then. There's no excuse for them being so inept this time around.

(7) The dragons: no reason for them to be so aggressive in the Hidden World. Captured dragons that have been rescued are not like that. It undermines their portrayal as pure, innocent beings that humans don't deserve, and robs Toothless of a chance to prove to the viewers he still remembers Hiccup without Hiccup having to show up in front of him.

(8) The epilogue implies that Hiccup and Astrid are making bad parenting choices, by giving their children an amazing experience (meeting dragons, flying) even though this is just giving them a taste of something they can never have.

* * *

Writing:

(1) Snotlout and the twins were beyond irritating and wasted precious screen time throwing off the pacing.

(2) Ambush scene in Hiccup's house. Hiccup risked Fishleg's life and did not take the right measures to capture Grimmel. Grimmel, for a supposedly intelligent villain walked right into a trap.

(3) Ruffnut's stupidity, and the rest of them for not noticing her absence, should not be used to drive the plot. Grimmel would be more intimidating if he could figure out where Berk went on his own.

(4) The fleet consists of speedboats apparently as they arrived the moment Ruffnut showed up. At the same time, Hiccup, Toothless, and the Light Fury all show up at the same spot, when they were in completely different locations all throughout the movie. How convenient for Grimmel, being so intelligent and cunning he can shape time and space itself to suit his own needs instead of relying on a clever plan!

(5) No one took any precautions about being followed. Valka warned them that they were.

(6) Deathgripper venom does whatever the plot demands at arbitrary dosages.

(7) Grimmel's claims that he has hunted all the Night Furies are unbelievable. His knowledge of them is questionable, as he is unaware of Toothless and thinks they can't stand the cold. Somehow every single last one left the Hidden World. Since they apparently mate for life, his bait won't work on Furies that have already mated.

(8) Toothless's power escalation is ridiculous.

(9) There's no way his tailfin will last long in the saltwater environment of Hidden World. These facts have already been established: tailfins, real or artificial, break. Night fury scales are not infallible, because they shed and scar.

(10) Is New Berk impenetrable or not? If it is, there is no reason to send the dragons away, because no one will be able to get to them. If it isn't, then New Berk is in danger, because they know what happened to the dragons and therefore are a target. In fact, the island is shown to be all but completely inaccessible by ship, and any place that is accessible could be defended.

(11) Why are Hiccup and Toothless deciding for everyone? No one has any input or puts up any resistance.

* * *

Themes:

(1) Humans don't deserve dragons is a ridiculous notion. By that view, we don't deserve dogs, birds, any animal, the land that we live in that was undoubtedly fought for and stolen from others, whatever. A movie about how all dogs disappeared from the world won't fly with the public. The question should not be about what we deserve, rather, we live in this reality and share it with others - how can we make the best of it?

(2) Does Berk deserve dragons? The dragons won't make an exception for Berk, and welcome the humans like the humans did for the dragons.

(3) The Hidden World is not a better place for dragons than the free and open skies and massive expanse of the seas. It is house arrest in a mansion. Not freedom.

(4) The environmental themes are confusing. Conservation doesn't involve uprooting animals from their current habitat, which results in numerous ecological issues.

(5) The situation in the HTTYD is considerably different from the films the director was inspired from. In Born Free, for example, a lion cub was taken out of its natural environment, away from its kind, into an unfamiliar human environment. In HTTYD, the dragons live on islands as they've always had, free to come and go as they wish and live with their own kind. A new "wild" had to be created for them in the form of the Hidden World and it fails to be convincing as a more suitable environment for them than what they already have.

(6) Resolving the conflict by separating dragons and humans is disturbing in its implications. It implies that segregation is a valid strategy, and presents an option that is impossible and inapplicable in real life.

(7) Problems don't go away by hiding them. Valka already tried that in the 2nd film. Problems are solved by addressing them head on. That's how life works.

(8) The dependency/independency themes are muddled. Hiccup needs to be independent, except when he shouldn't and needs to rely on his friends more.

(9) Suggesting they're too dependent on their dragons is as strange as saying Vikings are too dependent on their ships or hunters are too dependent on their dogs.

(10) The idea that friendships are expected to be fleeting compared to romantic relationships is a sad reflection on the current state of society. The first two films are a celebration of the platonic friendship, a breath of fresh air amidst the prevalence of Disney romances plaguing animated films. No one has issues with the idea that romantic love should be lifelong and surpass any barrier thrown at it, which is clearly expressed in HTTYD3, but switch that around to friendship and it suddenly becomes a crutch, an obstacle to personal development. That's not a healthy way to understand what a friend is for. We are all worse off by preserving this attitude and it's sad this film doesn't subvert this trope.

(11) It's unnecessary. Gift of the Night Fury already encompasses the same themes of sacrifice and letting go, and does it better by showing actual mourning and having both Hiccup and Toothless sacrifice for the other.


	3. The Hidden World - Alternate Ending

Disclaimer: I don't own HTTYD

The Hidden World - Alternate Ending

Grimmel had been defeated, but there were still people like him out there, who would always hate and fear dragons. So Hiccup made a choice that would break his heart, but it was to protect everyone, his people and the dragons alike. "Lead them to the Hidden World" he told Toothless, "You'll be safe there. Safer than you could ever be with" –

"Chief?"

They both started and looked down at the little girl, Fishlegs niece, Brenda. She was cuddling a Terror and her twin brothers were nearby, looking just as crestfallen. "Uh…yes?" Hiccup asked uncertainly, trying to sound reassuring.

Brenda sniffled. "Chief Hiccup, please don't make the dragons go away."

"We never got to ride one" Brant protested. Shrug pushed his long hair out of his eyes and added, "We'll miss them. They're our friends." The Terror chirped.

Hiccup felt his resolve waver. He struggled to think of how to explain it was for the best, for the dragon's own good, but then he was interrupted. "I don't normally agree with little kids, but this is a really dumb idea" Snotlout remarked. Astrid gave him a 'not helping' glare. "Well, it is!" he said defensively. "I mean, didn't Grimmel _want _a world without dragons? This means he's won!"

Everyone stared at Snotlout. Finally, Valka commented "You know, he…does have a good point. Sending the dragons away, even for their own safety, means that we're doing just what Grimmel and everyone likes him wants us to do – give up." Hiccup felt his throat grow tight. That hadn't even occurred to him.

"Why, thank you" Snotlout remarked. "Just so you know, I have plenty more 'good points' if you ever wanna" – Hookfang smacked him with his tail. "Ow!"

"Well, maybe if you weren't flirting with someone's _mother_" Fishlegs scolded. He turned to Hiccup. "Look, I want the dragons to be safe and happy too. But sending them all to the Hidden World…I mean, we don't even have every kind of dragon here. There's the Speed Stingers, the Buffalord, the Whispering and Screaming Deaths, the Death Song – we can't send them _all_ down there."

"Yeah, and uh, wasn't the whole point of rescuing dragons to get them out of cages?" Ruffnut asked, scratching her head. "And now you want to stick them underground? Isn't that just like putting them in a bigger cage?"

Tuffnut added "Besides, what gives you the right to decide what happens to all of our dragons? They might not even want to leave. Aren't you always going on and on and on about how loyal they are? Or have I missed something?"

Hiccup felt like he was the one missing things. "No, you – I mean – guys, I don't want to do this, but I have no choice" he said desperately. "Astrid, you were there. Toothless is the Alpha, he belongs with his own kind…you said I had to give him his freedom" Hiccup reminded her. _Love hurts, but it's worth the pain. _

Astrid saw how torn he was, and told him "I was wrong. I'm not perfect. I was worried you were using Toothless as a crutch, but you proved otherwise. What I said to you before, on the cliff…I should have told you all that a long time ago. I'm so sorry, Hiccup" she apologised. Some supportive future wife she was.

Tuffnut pointed out, "He _is _using Toothless as a crutch. Right now." Sure enough, Hiccup was using his dragon to stay upright, having lost his prosthetic.

Rolling her eyes, Astrid retorted "Not that kind of crutch. But it doesn't seem like he wants to leave" she said gently, nodding at Toothless. A thought occurred to her. "Hiccup…are you doing this because you think he's chosen the Light Fury over you?" she asked. Said white dragon was hovering on the edge, not invisible, but not coming any closer to the humans. But she was still there.

Hiccup barely stopped himself from saying _He did. _"He loves her, Astrid."

"Yeah, but he's just met her" Ruffnut interjected. "For all we know, he's only acting weird cos he's horny and she's in heat. He's thinking with his d" –

"Shush, Ruff" Astrid said sharply. She turned back to Hiccup and told him, "He loves you, too. Why does he need to choose? Be honest. If all this had never happened – Grimmel, the Light Fury, all of it – when we got married, were you going to send Toothless away then? To choose me over him?" she asked.

He flinched back against his dragon. "Of course not!" Hiccup protested.

"So why does he have to choose? He could have a mate _and _be your friend."

Hiccup swallowed hard. He looked at Toothless, who gazed up at him sadly. "It's up to you, bud. I just want you to be happy. If you'd rather be with her than – then I'll understa-agh!" Toothless licked him frantically and pulled him into a hug, clutching Hiccup to his chest like Brenda was holding that patient Terror.

Then he released Hiccup and looked at the rest of the flock, vocalising and gesturing. The dragons nuzzled their riders, and none of them seemed to want to leave. Hiccup couldn't wipe the smile off his face; until a thought crossed his mind. "What if she doesn't want to stay?" he worried, glancing at the Light Fury.

Toothless looked over at her, and warbled encouragingly. He nudged Hiccup towards her, whose eyes widened. Hesitantly, he held his hand out to her, averting his gaze. Valka and Astrid began ushering everyone else to a more respectful distance, over the children's protests that they wanted to see the Chief do 'the hand thing'. The Light Fury cautiously crept towards Hiccup.

When he felt scales against his fingers, and found the Light Fury had rested her snout in his palm, Hiccup felt new tears spring to his eyes. Tears of joy. "Thank you" he whispered. She pulled back and blinked at him, licking her nose. Toothless nuzzled them both, gurgling happily with a big gummy smile.

Hiccup let go of Toothless and awkwardly hopped towards the others, until Astrid came to support him – literally. He smiled gratefully at her, and announced "I guess that's that. The dragons are staying." Everyone, human and dragon alike, cheered. "Right – come on, guys. We have a village to build."

/

Over the next few days, weeks, the Light Fury gradually got used to the strangeness that was the Hooligan Tribe of Berk. At first she was skittish and standoffish, only showing affection to Toothless. Still, she seemed to like the nest Hiccup built for them, with shiny crystalline stones in the walls to make her feel more at home. As time went on, more of her personality emerged.

She was mischievous. She'd knock him off Toothless' back, not because she thought him a threat, but just because she found it funny. She was curious, especially about plants. Hiccup eventually named her 'Snowdrop' after seeing how she seemed to be fascinated by the little white flowers. She was graceful, and Toothless copied her, acting more like the Alpha he was meant to be.

He and Astrid were married at last, and Hiccup couldn't be happier. At least until a few weeks later, when she told him she was pregnant. "I'm gonna be a dad!" he told Toothless excitedly. In response, his dragon hauled him over to where Snowdrop was curled up in their nest…around three black and white splotched eggs. "Oh my gods…we're both gonna be dads. Congrats, you two!"

_Ten years later _

Hiccup and Astrid were taking their children for a ride to show them the entrance to the Hidden World, so their son and daughter would know what they were protecting. Zephyr rode with her mother and Nuffink with his father, the little boy squealing in glee as Hiccup tossed him into the air and caught him again. Snowdrop flew alongside them, trailed by three cute, chubby fledglings.

_There were dragons when I was a boy. Hopefully, there'll be dragons long after. _

_Peace isn't easy. It won't happen overnight. It probably won't happen in my lifetime. And uh, I'm okay with that. It's enough to know that one day, it could. _

_I've had to do things that still give me nightmares, to protect the ones I love. I'd do it all over again, because the dragons are the best thing that's ever happened to me. I don't want to give them up. And now, I know that I don't have to. _

_There are still enemies, dangers and threats out there; but there are also allies, and there's still hope. We will protect the secret of the Hidden World, and we'll keep fighting for what's right…until humans, and dragons, can live in peace. _


End file.
